From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [NETFILTER] Kill lockhelp.h for rtsp-conntrack Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 01:00:42 +0200 Message-ID: <4313939A.4030002@trash.net> References: <431375BA.7080900@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Harald Welte , netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org Return-path: To: Samir Bellabes In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Samir Bellabes wrote: > Patrick McHardy writes: > > >>All applied, thanks. I've changed the raw spinlock/rwlock declarations >>to DEFINE_SPINLOCK/DECLARE_RWLOCK. > > ok, thanks. > > >>>well, in fact, it should be applyed to a new 'linux-2.6.13' directory.. >> >>Do you mean it needs to be applied to other directories than -p1 in the >>patchlets dir? > > > I mean that linux-2.6.11 don't need this patch at all. > As far a you push 'kill lockhelp.h patch' in 2.6.13, people who use > p-o-m with a kernel version < 2.6.13, should use lockhelp.h again. > But now, this 3 patches will apply to all versions. I don't know what the general feeling about supporting old versions in pom is, I would tend to ignore them if it means starting a third linux subdirectory that should be maintained in some patchlets. Harald, what is your opinion on this?